📬 The Deal He Walked Away From That Became a Billion-Dollar Lesson
Jamie Siminoff, Doorbot → Ring
In 2013, Jamie Siminoff walked onto Shark Tank with a product called Doorbot — a smart doorbell that let you see and talk to visitors remotely.
Today, we know that company as Ring, later acquired by Amazon for a reported $1 billion.
But the deal he didn’t take is where the real lesson sits.
💼 The Ask (and the Maths)
Jamie asked for $700,000 in exchange for 10% of his business.
That means he was valuing the company at roughly $7 million:
$700,000 ÷ 10% = $7m
Most of the Sharks didn’t buy the vision. Comments included variations of:
“I don’t see the progression”
“I’m not connecting with the product”
“For that reason, I’m out”
Only one Shark made an offer — but with strings attached.
🦈 The Offer on the Table
The Shark offered:
$700,000 upfront
10% royalty on every sale
5% equity in the company
Jamie declined.
At the time, this looked bold — maybe reckless. The product wasn’t proven, cash was tight, and smart-home tech wasn’t mainstream yet.
But then came the outcome.
🚀 The Outcome (With Hindsight)
Doorbot rebranded to Ring, found traction, scaled fast, and eventually sold for ~$1 billion.
Had Jamie given up 5% equity, that slice alone could’ve been worth $50 million at exit.
By walking away:
He kept control
He avoided long-term cash drains
He retained the upside
In hindsight, it looks like a masterstroke.
🤔 But Here’s the Important Part: The Deal Could Have Made Sense
At the time, taking the deal wasn’t irrational.
Why saying yes may have helped:
$700k could’ve extended runway and reduced stress
Risk would’ve been shared
The company might not have survived without funding
Many great ideas fail simply because they run out of cash
Ownership only matters if the business lives long enough to be worth owning.
⚠️ The Royalty Problem
The real issue wasn’t just equity — it was the royalty.
A royalty means:
Every sale sends cash to the investor
Less money is left to reinvest in growth
As sales grow, the royalty becomes more painful
Simple example:
If Ring made $100m in sales, a 10% royalty means $10m paid out, every year.
That can slow growth, raise prices, or force external funding anyway.
Jamie likely saw that the royalty could hurt the business precisely when it started working.
🧠 A Smarter Middle Ground (In Theory)
There was a compromise that sometimes works:
$700k upfront
Smaller royalty, capped at 2–3× payback
No equity
That way:
Investor gets rewarded
Founder keeps ownership
Payments stop after a set return
But even this carries risk:
Slow sales = long repayment period
Fast sales = early cash pressure
There’s no free lunch — just different trade-offs.
🧾 The Takeaway
Jamie Siminoff made a high-risk, high-reward decision.
Saying yes would’ve reduced risk
Saying no maximised upside
It worked — spectacularly — but only because the business survived and scaled.
That’s the real lesson:
Deals don’t look smart or stupid when you make them.
They only look that way after the outcome.
And in this case, the outcome did all the talking.
Easy to call him a genius now…
But if Ring had failed, everyone would’ve said:
“Should’ve taken the money.”
That’s business — you only look clever after it works!